Forums

A clear problem: why we lose new players?

Indipendenza

I quite often see total beginners in Solo (!) which is the most complicated mode, in blitz, in bullet... Very certainly some also come to variants, etc. Have just played with another 1500? guy with ZERO games who joined a bullet game.

I.e. someone comes, sees just ANY GAME, clicks on it (to find out what 4p chess is about), and then either tries to understand what's on and gets mated or flags very fast, or simply disconnects.

WHAT THEN? In many cases he simply won't come back, ever. And will explain to all that 4p chess is just bullsh1t, with no interest.

 

As a consequence, our beautiful hobby remains a ghetto for happy few. That's not good.

 

It's at least 2 years that I've been repeating that:

- new players shouldn't even see variants, Solo, bullet, hyperbullet, etc., but only standard FFA and Teams and in 1/15. Until they've played let's say 20 or 50 games.

Today people enter (per curiosity), click just on any game, find themselves in bullet, hyperbullet, solo, some weird variant, or simply antichess, don't even understand what's on and then leave. I've seen already so many cases of 0-gamers in Solo bullet (double difficulty!) who come, make 1 move and leave, and certainly never come back,

- all the internal structure of the 4p subsite should be rethought in-depth, with clearly Standard Rapid FFA and Teams presented apart, and everything else separately, for example when you pass your mouse on someone, no need to see 14 (!!!) ratings like now, it's totally counterproductive, and no need to have 14 leaderboards neither, etc., one should only be able to see in fact 5-6 main ones, the other being only accessible via specific pages for people who are interested in them as they anyway tend to play within small ghetto communities; same for arenas as well, these shouldn't be visible for newcomers,

- when one arrives, he shouldn't be even able to JOIN a game before he's seen either a small 30-60 sec. video or 3-4 pages of presentation with main rules, among which main chat rules as well, basic explanation about the different FORMATS, TIMINGS, MODES available, i.e. an introduction.

 

I am quite sure that we lose many potential excellent players just because they come, find themselves in something very specific and then never come back, as they haven't been received properly. As former Mktg director of one (large) website, I often say to myself that something is terribly wrong here and my heart is bleeding as I know that like that we condemn ourselves to remain a very narrow community whereas 4p chess deserves much better.

And I am sure it's simple to fix. With two separate spaces, "new comers" and "pros"... Not everything should be visible by the first category, definitely. Please, make it clear and simple for them. Later they will progress and discover new exciting possibilities and features.

(Same for game configuration: it is complex and shouldn't be accessible to new players who should only have simple TWO BUTTONS, "launch a 1/15 Teams game", "launch a 1/15 FFA game"). No +40, no anon., no 9p queens, no 11th rank promotion, etc. etc. 

neoserbian

Agree with you Indi. After 3 years ( time when I discovered 4pc ) we have only 10.000 new members! Too little!

Please, if you're not interested in a topic, don't write all kinds of nonsense - it's not funny, trust me. Open a new topic and make fun of yourself as much as you want, just avoid serious topics anymore.

noahfavelo

actually, I played a standard FFA game first and was totally overwhelmed for the first one then bored the second so I now just play variants, coincidentally my look for games bar is always set for varients/antichess - but that's just me.

pjfoster13

I have said before that all games should automatically be created in a matchmaking queue. Whoever initiates a game should automatically populate <1400, 1400-1600, 1600-1900, 1900-2200, 2200+

Keeps players in their respective skill levels, allows new players to learn the game against one another in the intro bucket, allows players to ladder up without playing against farmers. 

I would be interested to know what are the arguments against this 

GentooPenguin10

No offense to anybody I've played, but most of my Teams games weren't a challenge. Usually people 1400 - 1600. Me and my partner got challenges once in a while, but most weren't. I agree with what @pfjoster13, except the partner I play with is around 2000. I should probably reopen my old account...

RatingCrisis
GentooPenguin10 wrote:

No offense to anybody I've played, but most of my Teams games weren't a challenge. Usually people 1400 - 1600. Me and my partner got challenges once in a while, but most weren't. I agree with what @pfjoster13, except the partner I play with is around 2000. I should probably reopen my old account...

want a challenge? play 1800+

hahaha4315

lots of people starts with team, cause they want to know what it is., but sometimes... they make their teammate lose

Indipendenza
pjfoster13 a écrit :

I have said before that all games should automatically be created in a matchmaking queue. Whoever initiates a game should automatically populate <1400, 1400-1600, 1600-1900, 1900-2200, 2200+

Keeps players in their respective skill levels, allows new players to learn the game against one another in the intro bucket, allows players to ladder up without playing against farmers. 

I would be interested to know what are the arguments against this 

 

Why not.

I personally think that in Standard modes, all games where the delta between the strongest and weakest players are beyond some threshold (I would say, 200 pts), the rating changes should be discriminated a lot, let's say DIVIDED PER 10. As such games are much less relevant. And believe me, most players will then launch games with correct settings wink.png

DarkKnightRisesV2

Maybe not force them into a different arena, but at least but a big banner that says "beginner arena here" happy.png. Or maybe that is the right idea, and we make all their first games casual, or <1700 or something. When you start playing any game, you don't start against the best. Maybe when we move to variants server....

side note, I think this would discourage spam-opening new accounts, as it would take time to get back to where one was if one has to wait time/games to play as a "pro"

Indipendenza

Yes, very good point! Indeed!

ninjaswat

Well I play exclusively 4PC teams with friends and nothing else, I get confused by the dynamics of solo but have gotten to 1800 teams playing on a call with people I know. I probably won't do much of the variant anyways because a majority of the time playing in my own makes me go to standard chess.

GentooPenguin10
RatingCrisis wrote:
GentooPenguin10 wrote:

No offense to anybody I've played, but most of my Teams games weren't a challenge. Usually people 1400 - 1600. Me and my partner got challenges once in a while, but most weren't. I agree with what @pfjoster13, except the partner I play with is around 2000. I should probably reopen my old account...

want a challenge? play 1800+

not enough rating.

Kobi2006

when i first joined i couldn't play solo and i know of other ppl who couldn't play it,

but then when it gave me the option ( after i think something like 10-20 game idk exactly )  to play solo i wanted to join and the game i joined was bullet and i did what @Indipendenza has been saying   either tries to understand what's on and gets mated or flags very fast, or simply disconnects. 

parthrane15

my teams rating is less than my ffa rating because sometimes in teams we lose because of our partner's mistake or getting a 1000 rated partner

GentooPenguin10
parthrane15 wrote:

my teams rating is less than my ffa rating because sometimes in teams we lose because of our partner's mistake or getting a 1000 rated partner

Grable's wise words: I never play teams without a specified partner. (Not that exactly, something like that.)

Driller6

I just started running into Anonymous games. Basically it is a team(s) of 2000+ rated players always playing together and hiding their identity. Why?  Because nearly always they are ranked with either one or both lower ranked players, and these games would have been aborted at the outset.

Who wants to play against two higher ranked players, who clearly have coordinating for loads of games?  So to prevent aborting, they are hiding their identities.

Yet another reason why this game doesn't hold new players for long.

Tails204

We lose new players because they think that FFA means Free For All.
LOL.
I disagree with the fact that they shouldn't play Solo games. In my opinion, it's the only thing they need to play as a first game.

MayimChayim
Tails204 wrote:

We lose new players because they think that FFA means Free For All.
LOL.
I disagree with the fact that they shouldn't play Solo games. In my opinion, it's the only thing they need to play as a first game.

It is free for all at the beginner level, and I agree they should be able to play solo 1st game.

I like the idea indi, but I believe they should be able to play anything that is a rapid time control for the first 25-50 games or so. Because there are also a lot of people who are interested only in variants.